MINISTRY OF HIGHER AND SECONDARY SPECIAL EDUCATION
REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN ANDIZHAN STATE UNIVERSITY
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PHONETICS
COURSE PAPER ON THE
THEME:
“Comparative analysis of English and Uzbek reduction in
different languages”
Done by student of the 4th
year Kimsanova G.
__________________
Scientific supervisor:
G. Ibragimova
_________________
Graduate paper has been passed preliminary defense.
Protocol № ____________________ 2016 Andizhan
2017
Content:
Introduction………………………………………………………………..
Chapter I. The theory of proverbs and sayings in modern linguistics 1.1.
Different approaches of linguists about the theory of proverbs and
sayings………………………………………………………………………
1.2. Proverbs as one of the sources of phraseological derivation……………
Chapter II. Comparative analysis of reduction in different languages in
English and Uzbek
2.1. Translation problems of proverbs and sayings from one language into
another……………………………………………………………………………...
2.2. Typology of reduction in different languages………
Chapter III. Problems of linguodidactics teaching English reduction in
different languages at Uzbek schools
3.1. Effective strategies for teaching the English reduction in different
languages at Uzbek schools…………………………………….
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………..
Literature to be used……………………………………………………….
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays learning and teaching foreign languages are very important
process. However, it is necessary to admit the circumstance that foreign languages
should be taught in a comparative way without causing damage to the mother
language. Only in this way our children, studying at academic lyceum and vocational
colleges will be able to open for themselves the beautiful and wonderful world of
world languages. In this respect, it will be appropriate to cite the words of the First
President of the Republic of Uzbekistan Islam Karimov, who said: “Our land
produced outstanding scientists who are the pride of the whole world. We have all
conditions to continue and enrich national traditions of scientific thinking established
by them” [2, 51].English is generally acknowledged to be the world’s most important
language. It is perhaps worth glancing briefly at the basis for that evaluation. There
are, after all, thousands of different languages in the world, and each will seem
uniquely important to those who speak it as their native language, the language they
acquired at their mother’s knee. But there are more objective standards of relative
importance. One criterion is the number of speakers of the language. A second is the
extent to which a language is geographically dispersed.
On December 10, 2012 the First President of the Republic of Uzbekistan
Islam Karimov signed a decree “On measures to further improve foreign language
learning system”.
On the basis of above-said we have chosen the theme of our course paper
“Comparative analysis of the reduction in different languages”. Thereis always
demand for expressing these reduction and sayings to not only our young generation
outside of our country.
The actuality of the course paper. The reduction in different languages have
a great role in giving and getting clear understanding about senility and youthof the
nation or society who uses these languages and preventing from any
misunderstandings about the concepts. This makes the actuality of our course paper.
The aim of the course paper is to investigate how the reduction in different
languages by different language units in both languages and to describe the universal
and specific features of these concepts. In the same time studying linguodidactic
problems of teaching the concept and giving suggestions to solve the problem are
also our main goals.
To achieve our goals the following tasks are set up in the course paper:
1. To review works devoted to reduction in different languages.
2. To investigate reduction in different languages of words in both languages.
3. To study different approaches of linguists about the theory reduction in
different languages.
4. To establish specific and universal features of the reduction in different
languages in both cultures analyzing the language units of modern English
and Uzbek.
5. To study the linguo didactic problems of the proverbs and sayings in teaching
and try to give solutions for the problems in order to help teaching process.
The object of the course paper is the reduction in different languages in
English and Uzbek.
The subject of the course paper is to investigate reduction in different
languages by various language units like words, phrases, proverbs sayings and
quotations.
Materials of the research. the materials of both languages were widely used
in
the
work.
Among
them
we
may
mention:D.Geeraerts,
F.T.Wood,
V.V.Vinogradov, A.I. Smirnitsky, I.V.Arnold, O.S. Ahmanova, A.V. Koonin,
S.R.Rakhimov, E.Begmatov, Sh.Rahmatullayev and etc.
During the research the following methods are used:
• Componential analysison the basis of dictionary definitions and corpus data of
the words.
• Conceptual analysisof the reduction in different languagesby language means.
• Comparative analysis method
• The linguistic observation method.
• Parts of sentence method.
• Deductive method.
Methodology of the research is based on the works by our First President
I.A.Karimov, Presidential decrees on educational field, national program for
Personal Training, and works in which the theme of the paper was researched and
analyzed by various researchers like D.Geeraerts, F.T.Wood, V.V. Vinogradov, A.I.
Smirnitsky, I.V.Arnold, O.S. Ahmanova, A.V. Koonin, S.R.Rakhimov,
E.Begmatov, Sh.RahmatullayevS. Z.Tillayeva, T.K.Mardiyev and etc.
The novelty of the work lies on the fact that reduction in different languages
in modern English and Uzbek was researched through the dissertations and various
works and we also tried to give new thoughts about the theme and give some more
proper answers related to the theme in current paper. The problems of
linguodidactics in teaching the theme under discussion are considered and
investigated as it was weak-point of some works.
The theoretical significance of the paper is connected with the fact that the
conceptual analysis of the reduction in different languages and the procedure of
establishing the conceptual characteristics of these concepts can be used at the
lectures on Cognitive linguistics and Cultural linguistics.
The practical significance of the course paper lies on the fact that the
practical materials and examples of reduction in different languages by means of
words, phrases and proverbs and sayings can be used as practical material at the
lectures on Cognitive linguistics, Cultural linguistics and Lexicology and
Linguodidactics.
The structure of the course paper consists of an introduction, three chapters,
conclusion and bibliography.
Introduction states the actuality and novelty, the aim, the reason of choosing
this theme and the methods used in the course paper. It also gives information about
the plot of the course paper.
There are three chapters as a main part: the theoretical basis and the analysis
of practical examples on the theoretical basis and the problems in teaching.
Chapter I deals with general notes on the The theory of proverbs and sayings
in modern linguistics.
Chapter II is devoted to comparative analysis of English and Uzbek reduction
in different languages.
In Chapter III we paid our main attention to the problems in teaching process
analyzing the culture-specific features of two languages and tried to answer some
important questions about the problems of linguodidactics.
In conclusion part the results gained in the course paper are summarized and
described.
The bibliography includes the items of the scientific literature on the theme
and different types of the dictionaries of the English and Uzbek languages which
were used as source of materials. Apart from that some Internet sites used during the
research are also included.
CHAPTER I. THE THEORY OF REDUCTIONS IN DIFFERENT
LANGUAGES.
1.1 Three different types of reduction are noticed in English
Reduction is a historical process of weakening, shortening or disappearance of
vowel sounds in unstressed positions.
The neutral sound represents the reduced form of almost any vowel or diphthong
in the unstressed position, eg: ‘project — pro’ject. The sounds [l] and also [u] in the
suffix -ful are very frequent realizations of the unstressed positions, eg beautiful.
Non-reduced unstressed sounds are often retained in:
(a) compound words, eg blackboard,
(b) borrowings from the French and other languages, eg kolkhoz
Reduction is closely connected not only with word stress but also with rhythm
and sentence stress. Stressed words are pronounced with great energy of breath.
So reduction is realized:
(a) in unstressed syllables within words, eg de’monstrative;
(b) in unstressed form-words, auxiliary and modal verbs, personal and possessive
pronouns within intonation groups and phrases.
Three different types of reduction are noticed in English.
1. Quantitative reduction - shortening of a vowel sound in the unstressed
position, affects mainly long vowels, eg he [hi:— hi). When does he ‘come?
2. Qualitative reduction - obscuration (затемнение) of vowels towards [э, i, u],
affects both long and short vowels, eg can [с96n-cэn]. You can ‘easily do it.
Vowels in unstressed form-words in most cases undergo both quantitative and
qualitative reduction
3. Elision of vowels in the unstressed position, eg I'm up ‘already. Elision is
normally unintentional, but it may be deliberate.
Recommendations.
1. Reduced vowels should be made very weak. Sometimes they are even dropped
in fluent speech, eg factory.
2. Unknown words esp. compound and borrowed should be looked up in a
dictionary to check their pronunciation.
3. Weaken unstressed form-words, personal and possessive pronouns, auxiliary
and modal verbs whenever it is necessary.
In phonetics, vowel reduction is any of various changes in the acoustic quality of
vowels as a result of changes in stress, sonority, duration, loudness, articulation, or
position in the word (e.g. for the Creek language), and which are perceived as
"weakening". It most often makes the vowels shorter as well.
Vowels which have undergone vowel reduction may be called reduced or weak.
In contrast, an unreduced vowel may be described as full or strong.
Transcription
Common reduced vowels
(IPA provides only ⟨ə⟩ and ⟨ɐ⟩)
Nearfront
Near-close
Central
ᵻ (ɨ)
Nearback
ᵿ (ɵ)
Mid
ə
Near-open
ɐ
There are several ways to distinguish full and reduced vowels in transcription.
Some English dictionaries mark full vowels for secondary stress, so that e.g. ⟨ˌɪ⟩ is a
full unstressed vowel while ⟨ɪ⟩ is a reduced, unstressed schwi.[a] Or the vowel quality
may be portrayed as distinct, with reduced vowels centralized, such as full ⟨ʊ⟩ vs
reduced ⟨ᵿ⟩ or ⟨ɵ⟩. Since the IPA only supplies letters for two reduced vowels, open
⟨ɐ⟩ and mid ⟨ə⟩, transcribers of languages such as RP English and Russian that have
more than these two vary in their choice between an imprecise use of IPA letters such
as ⟨ɨ⟩ and ⟨ɵ⟩,[b] or of custom non-IPA (extended IPA) letters such as ⟨ᵻ⟩ and ⟨ᵿ⟩.
Weakening of vowel articulation
Cardinal vowel chart showing peripheral (white) and central (blue) vowel space,
based on the chart in Collins & Mees (2003:227)
Phonetic reduction most often involves a mid-centralization of the vowel, that is,
a reduction in the amount of movement of the tongue in pronouncing the vowel, as
with the characteristic change of many unstressed vowels at the ends of English words
to something approaching schwa. A well-researched type of reduction is that of the
neutralization of acoustic distinctions in unstressed vowels, which occurs in many
languages. The most common reduced vowel is schwa.
Whereas full vowels are distinguished by height, backness, and roundness,
according to Bolinger (1986), reduced unstressed vowels are largely unconcerned
with height or roundness. English /ə/, for example, may range phonetically from mid
[ə] to [ɐ] to open [a]; English /ᵻ/ ranges from close [ï], [ɪ̈ ], [ë], to open-mid [ɛ̈]. The
primary distinction is that /ᵻ/ is further front than /ə/, contrasted in the numerous
English words ending in unstressed -ia. That is, the jaw, which to a large extent
controls vowel height, tends to be relaxed when pronouncing reduced vowels.
Similarly, English /ᵿ/ ranges through [ʊ̈] and [ö̜]; although it may be labialized to
varying degrees, the lips are relaxed in comparison to /uː/, /oʊ/, or /ɔː/. The primary
distinction in words like folio is again one of backness. However, the backness
distinction is not as great as that of full vowels; reduced vowels are also centralized,
and are sometimes referred to by that term. They may also be called obscure, as there
is no one-to-one correspondence between full and reduced vowels.[3]
Sound duration is a common factor in reduction: In fast speech, vowels are
reduced due to physical limitations of the articulatory organs, e.g., the tongue cannot
move to a prototypical position fast or completely enough to produce a full-quality
vowel (compare with clipping). Different languages have different types of vowel
reduction, and this is one of the difficulties in language acquisition; see, e.g., "Nonnative pronunciations of English" and "Anglophone pronunciation of foreign
languages". Vowel reduction of second language speakers is a separate study.
Stress-related vowel reduction is a principal factor in the development of IndoEuropean ablaut, as well as other changes reconstructed by historical linguistics.
Vowel reduction is one of the sources of distinction between a spoken language
and its written counterpart. Vernacular and formal speech often have different levels
of vowel reduction, and so the term "vowel reduction" is also applied to differences in
a language variety with respect to, e.g., the language standard.
Some languages, such as Finnish, Hindi, and classical Spanish, are claimed to
lack vowel reduction. Such languages are often called syllable-timed languages.[4] At
the other end of the spectrum, Mexican Spanish is characterized by the reduction or
loss of the unstressed vowels, mainly when they are in contact with the sound /s/. [5][6]
It can be the case that the words pesos, pesas, and peces are pronounced the same:
[ˈpesə̥s].
In some cases phonetic vowel reduction may contribute to phonemic
(phonological) reduction, which means merger of phonemes, induced by
indistinguishable pronunciation. This sense of vowel reduction may occur by means
other than vowel centralisation, however.
Many Germanic languages, in their early stages, reduced the number of vowels
that could occur in unstressed syllables, without (or before) clearly showing
centralisation. Proto-Germanic and its early descendant Gothic still allowed more or
less the full complement of vowels and diphthongs to appear in unstressed syllables,
except notably short /e/, which merged with /i/. In early Old High German and Old
Saxon, this had been reduced to five vowels (i, e, a, o, u, some with length
distinction), later reduced further to just three short vowels (i/e, a, o/u). In Old Norse,
likewise, only three vowels were written in unstressed syllables: a, i and u (their exact
phonetic quality is unknown). Old English, meanwhile, distinguished only e, a, and u
(again the exact phonetic quality is unknown).
Specific languages
English
Stress is a prominent feature of the English language, both at the level of the
word (lexical stress) and at the level of the phrase or sentence (prosodic stress).
Absence of stress on a syllable, or on a word in some cases, is frequently associated in
English with vowel reduction – many such syllables are pronounced with a
centralized vowel (schwa) or with certain other vowels that are described as being
"reduced" (or sometimes with a syllabic consonant as the syllable nucleus rather than
a vowel). Various phonological analyses exist for these phenomena.
Latin
Old Latin had initial stress, and short vowels in non-initial syllables were
frequently reduced. Long vowels were usually not reduced.
Vowels reduced in different ways depending on the phonological environment.
For instance, in most cases, they reduced to /i/. Before l pinguis, an /l/ not followed by
/i iː l/, they became Old Latin /o/ and Classical Latin /u/. Before /r/ and some
consonant clusters, they became /e/.

fáciō, *ád-faciō > Old Latin fáciō, áfficiō "make, affect"
fáctos, *ád-factos > fáctos, áffectos "made, affected" (participles)

sáltō, *én-saltō > Old Latin sáltō, ínsoltō "I jump, I jump on"

parō, *pe-par-ai > Latin párō, péperī "I give birth, I gave birth"
In Classical Latin, stress changed position and so in some cases, reduced vowels
became stressed. Stress moved to the penult if it was heavy or to the antepenult
otherwise.

Classical Latin fáciō, affíciō
fáctus, afféctus

sáltō, īnsúltō
Romance languages
Vulgar Latin had seven vowels in stressed syllables (a, ɛ, e, i, ɔ, o, u). In
unstressed syllables, ɛ merged into e and ɔ merged into o, yielding five possible
vowels. Some Romance languages, like Italian, maintain this system, while others
have made adjustments to the number of vowels permitted in stressed syllables, the
number of vowels permitted in unstressed syllables, or both. Some Romance
languages, like Spanish, French and Romanian, lack vowel reduction altogether.
Italian
Standard Italian has seven stressed vowels and five unstressed vowels, as in
Vulgar Latin. Some regional varieties of the language, influenced by local
vernaculars, do not distinguish open and closed e and o even in stressed syllables.
Neapolitan
Neapolitan has seven stressed vowels and only four unstressed vowels, with e
and o merging into /ə/. At the end of a word, unstressed a also merges with e and o,
reducing the number of vowels permitted in this position to three.
Sicilian
Sicilian has five stressed vowels (a, ɛ, i, ɔ, u) and three unstressed vowels, with ɛ
merging into i and ɔ merging into u. Unlike Neapolitan, Catalan or Portuguese,
Sicilian incorporates this vowel reduction into its orthography.
Catalan
Catalan has seven vowels in stressed syllables and three, four or five vowels in
unstressed syllables, depending on dialect. The Valencian dialect has five, as in
Vulgar Latin. Majorcan merges unstressed a and e, and central Catalan further merges
unstressed o and u.
Portuguese
Portuguese has seven or eight vowels in stressed syllables (a, ɐ, ɛ, e, i, ɔ, o, u).
The vowels a and ɐ, which are not phonemically distinct in all dialects, merge in
unstressed syllables. In most cases, unstressed syllables may have one of five vowels
(a, e, i, o, u), but there is a sometimes unpredictable tendency for e to merge with i
and o to merge with u. For instance some speakers pronounce the first syllable of
dezembro ("December") differently from the first syllable of dezoito ("eighteen"),
with the latter being more reduced. There are also instances of ɛ and ɔ being
distinguished from e and o in unstressed syllables, especially to avoid ambiguity. The
verb pregar ("to nail") is distinct from pregar ("to preach"), and the latter verb was
historically spelled prègar to reflect that its unstressed ɛ is not reduced.
Portuguese phonology is further complicated by its variety of dialects,
particularly the differences between European Portuguese and Brazilian Portuguese,
as well as the differences between the respective dialects of the two varieties.
Slavic languages
Bulgarian
In the Bulgarian language the vowels а, о and е can be partially or fully reduced,
depending on the dialect, when unstressed to ъ, у and и, respectively. The most
prevalent is а > ъ, and о > у, which, in it's partial form, is considered correct in
literary speech. The reduction е > и is prevalent in the eastern dialects of the language
and is not considered formally correct.
Russian
There are six vowel phonemes in Standard Russian. Vowels tend to merge when
they are unstressed. The vowels /a/ and /o/ have the same unstressed allophones for a
number of dialects and reduce to a schwa. Unstressed /e/ may become more central if
it does not merge with /i/.
Other types of reduction are phonetic, such as that of the high vowels (/i/ and
/u/), which become near-close; этап ('stage') is pronounced [ɪˈtap], and мужчина
('man') is pronounced [mʊˈɕːinə].
Early Slavic languages
Proto-Slavic had two short high vowels known as yers: a short high front vowel,
denoted as ĭ or ь, and a short back vowel, denoted as ŭ or ъ. Both vowels underwent
reduction and were eventually deleted in certain positions in a word in the early Slavic
languages, beginning from the late dialects of Proto-Slavic. The process is known as
Havlík's law.
1.2. Linguistic reductions
Linguistic reductions are lost sounds in words, which happens in spoken
English. For instance, "going to" changes to "gonna". The most common reductions
are contractions. Most contractions are reductions of 'not'. For instance, "cannot"
becomes "can't". Many contractions are reductions between a subject and a verb. For
instance, "He is..." becomes "He's..."
Some reductions are known to language learners, such as the reduction of a verb
and "to". Examples are "going to" becoming "gonna" and "want to" becoming
"wanna".
Linguistic reductions are part of natural English and should not be considered
slang or improper.
Categories
There are several basic categories of reductions:

Elision is one or more sounds left out of a word. A common example is "and",
which frequently changes to "an" or sometimes even "n". Another example is
the "ba" sound in "probably", which leads to the pronunciation, "probly".

Word stress is a weaker stress on a word. The words near it are stressed more
by comparison. The weakly-stressed word may be blended, linked or even
deleted.

Function words are words that signify grammatical relations and are different
from content words. Content words tend to carry more information andare often
stressed. Function words are often unstressed andmay be reduced, blended,
linked or deleted.
Reduction is a historical process of weakening, shortening and disappearance of
vowel sounds in unstressed positions. The neutral sound represents the reduced form
of almost any vowel in the unstressed position ([kəm'bain]), besides, the sounds [i]
and [u] in the suffix –ful are very frequent realizations of the unstressed positions
(['bju:tiful]). There is also a tendency to retain the quality of the unstressed vowel
sound (retreat, programme).
Non-reduced unstressed vowels are often retained in:
1) compound words (blackboard);
2) borrowings from other languages (kolkhoz).
Reduction is closely connected with word stress, rhythm and sentence-stress.
Stressed words are pronounced with greater energy of breath. Regular loss of
sentence-stress of certain words is connected with partial or complete loss of their
lexical significance. These words play the part of form-words in a sentence. So
reduction is realized in unstressed syllables within words and in unstressed formwords, auxiliary and modal verbs, personal and possessive pronouns within intonation
groups.
There are three types of reduction noticed in English:
1.
Quantitative, that is shortening of a long vowel in the unstressed
position ([hi: -hi].
2.
Qualitative, that is obscuration of vowels towards [ə, i, u], affects
both long and short vowels ([kæn-kən]).
Vowels in unstressed form-words in most cases undergo both qualitative and
quantitative reduction ([tu:-tu-tə]).
1.
Elision of vowels in the unstressed position (I’m [aim]).
Strong and weak forms.
Words
the
a
at
from
of
to
into
for
you
he
she
we
me
her
his
him
us
them
your
our
be
been
am
are
is
was
were
have
has
had
can
Strong forms
ði:
ei + C; æn + V
æt
from
ov
tu:
intu:
fo: + C; fo:r + V
ju:
hi:
ò i:
wi:
mi:
hə: + C; hə:r + V
hiz
him
^s
ðem
jo: + C; jo:r +V
auə +C; auər + V
bi:
bi:n
æm
a: +C; a:r +V
iz
woz
wə: +C; wə:r +V
hæv
hæz
hæd
kæn
Weak, reduced forms
ðə + C; ði + V
ə + C; ən + V
ət
frəm
əv
tə + C; tu + V
intə + C; intu + V
fə + C; fər + V
ju
hi, i
òi
wi˙, wi
mi˙, mi
hə˙, hə, ə + C; hər, ər + V
iz
im
əs, s
ðəm, əm
jo˙, jo, jə +C; jo˙, jo, jə +V
aə +C; aər + V
bi
bin
əm
a˙, ə +C; a˙r, ər +V
iz, z, s
wəz
wə +C; wər +V
həv, əv, v
həz, əz, z/s
həd, əd, d
kən, kn
could
kud
kəd, kd
must
m^st
məst, məs
will
wil
l
would
wud
wəd, əd, d
shall
òæl
òəl, l
should
òud
òəd, òd
do
du:
du˙, du, də
does
d^z
dəz
and
ænd
ənd, ən, n
that
ðæt
ðət
but
b^t
bət
than
ðæn
ðən, ðn
as
æz
əz
or
o: +C; o:r +V
o˙, o, ə +C; o˙r, or, ə +V
to
tu:
tə+C; tu +V
there
ðeə
ðə +C; ðər +V
Words which bear the major part of information are generally stressed and are
called content (or notional) words (nouns adjectives, notional verbs, adverbs,
numerals, interrogative and demonstrative pronouns (in the function of the subject of
a sentence). The other words in a sentence are mostly form (or structural) words
which link the content words and in this way help to form an utterance (articles,
prepositions, conjunctions, particles, auxiliary and modal verbs, personal and
possessive pronouns). They are normally unstressed in a sentence, their weak reduced
forms are generally used in speech.
Strong and weak forms.
Prepositions have their strong forms though they might remain unstressed:
1) at the very end of an intonation group or phrase (What are you looking at?).
2) at the end of an intonation group or phrase when they are followed by the
unstressed pronoun (I am not `talking to you).
Polysyllabic prepositions followed by a pronoun at the end of a phrase are
stressed as rule (Have a look `under it).
Auxiliary and modal verbs have their strong forms:
1) at the end of an intonation group or phrase whether stressed or not (Mary has
[hæz].);
2) at the beginning of general and alternative questions in careful colloquial style
(Can [kæn] you get it by tomorrow?);
3) in contracted negative forms (I don’t [dount] know the man.).
The following form-words should be remembered as having no weak forms:
what, where, when, how, which, on, in, with, then.
The verb “to have” used as a content verb in the meaning of “to possess” has no
weak forms.
The demonstrative pronoun “that” is never reduced, while the conjunction “that”
is. Neither are reduced the absolute forms of possessive pronouns.
All the form words, auxiliary and modal verbs, personal and possessive pronouns
are generally stressed and consequently have their strong forms in case they become
the logical centres of phrases.
CHAPTER II. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF REDUCTION IN
DIFFERENT LANGUAGES
The subject and copula must be independently omissible in the relevant contexts if
the hypothesis put forward here is to gain any traction. Uzbek is a pro-drop language,
so the absence of subjects inside nominalized embedded clauses is no surprise. There
is more to say as to the status of copulas, however.
(47) a. Kechabir bola bir qiz-gapul ber-di, lekin qaysi bola, qaysi
yesterday one boy one girl-dat money give-pst.3sg but which boy which
qiz-ga-lig-i-ni
bil-ma-y-man.
girl-dat-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-neg-prs-1sg
‘Yesterday some boy gave money to some girl, but I don’t know which boy (it was
and) which girl (it was).’
b.
Kecha
bir bola bir qiz-ga pul
ber-di,
lekin qaysi bola va
qaysi
yesterday one boy one girl-dat money give-pst.3sg but which boy and which
qiz-ga-lig-i-ni
bil-ma-y-man.
girl-dat-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-neg-prs-1sg
‘Yesterday some boy gave money to some girl, but I don’t know which boy (it was)
and which girl (it was).’
c.
∗Kecha
bir bola bir qiz-ga pul
ber-di,
lekin qaysi bola
qaysi yesterday one boy one girl-dat money give-pst.3sg but
which qiz-ga-lig-i-ni
which boy
bil-ma-y-man.
girl-dat-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-neg-prs-1sg
However, as a referee points out, these could also be instances of a coordinated
multiple wh-structure, either with an overt or null coordinator. Since the data are
inconclusive, I leave this question unresolved for the present.
14
There is an alternative reduction strategy that has sometimes been invoked for clefts
by Van Craenenbroeck (2004), Rodrigues et al. (2009) and others: clefting in a wh-
movement language would still yield a situation in which IP deletion could obtain.
There are a few reasons why such an approach seems untenable for the data under
discussion. First, if this strategy were to work, it would work only for clefting but not
for plain copular clauses, in which the pivot is not left-peripheral. A unified
explanation of how the reduction occurs would seem preferable. Second, I
demonstrate in §5 that the relativized clause portion of the cleft is adjoined high
enough in the structure that ellipsis at the IP level might not elide it.
The Uzbek copula (-e-) is historically defective (Sjoberg, 1963), and is not
pronounced in present tense in root clauses of the modern language (48).
(48)
a.
Men O’zbekiston-dan-(*e-)man.
IUzbekistan-abl-(*cop-)1sg
‘I’m from Uzbekistan.’
b.
Siz talaba-(*e-)siz. you student-(*cop-)2sg
‘You’re a student.’
c.
U
och
(*e).
he/she hungry (*cop)
‘He is hungry.’
When the copula is pronounced, it requires a host. This is the case in the simple past
tense of root clauses, where the copula is pronounced obligatorily on non-verbal
predicates (49) and optionally on verbal predicates as part of the pluperfect tense (50)
(Kononov, 1960).
(49)
a.
Men-ga qovoq
kerak e-di.
Me-dat pumpkin needed cop-pst.3sg
‘I needed a pumpkin.’
b.
Men o’qituvchi e-di-m.
I
teacher
‘I was a teacher.’
cop-pst-1sg
(50)
a.
Men yoz-gan
e-di-m.
Iwrote-prf cop-pst-1sg
‘I had written.’
b.
Men yoz-gan-di-m.
I
write-prf-pst-1sg
‘I had written.’
The variants in (50) are interchangeable, and can be found both in formal speech and
writing (Kononov, 1960).
In root clauses, when the copula -e- is suffixed with -kan-, the resulting interpretation
is past tense and evidential (Straughn, 2011).
(51)
Farhod bir kishi-ga
pul
ber-ar e-kan. Farhod a
person-dat
money
give-hab cop-prf
‘Farhod was (apparently) in the habit of giving some person money.’
Recall that most tense marking, including simple past, is not permitted inside
nominalized domains. Correspondingly, forms like e-di (the simple past of be) are
never attested in those environments.
Instead, what we find are instances of the copula attached to the -kan- morpheme.
(52)
U-ning
Hasan (e-kan)-lig-i-ni
bil-a-siz-mi?
3sg-gen Hasan (cop-kan)-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-2sg-q
‘Do you know that he is Hasan?’
E-kan in (52) is surface similar to the e-kan that is found in evidential root clauses
(51), but the embedded version of this triggers no evidential reading. It is tempting to
think of the copula-adjacent -kan- as a version of -gan-, the participial morpheme that
attaches to full verbs in embedded clauses (see §2.3). This is because participial -ganundergoes voicing assimilation and can be realized as [kan] (53b).
(53)
a.
Men chiq-qan
tog’-im
Iascend-pst.ptcp mountain-1sg.poss
‘The mountain I climbed’
b.
U-ning
daraxt-lar ek-kan-lig-i-ni
bil-a-man.
3sg-gen tree-plplant-pst.ptcp-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
‘I know that he planted trees.’
However, there are several indications that kan in (52) is not variant of the participial
morpheme. First, participial -gan- may come in other forms, namely the past
progressive (-yotgan-) and the present-future (-digan-) (54); the -kan- of e-kan cannot
(55b,c).
(54)
a.
I
you(-gen) Farhod-dat money give-prog.ptcp-comp-2sg.poss-acc
Men siz(-ning) Farhod-ga
pul
ber-ayotgan-lig-ingiz-ni
bil-a-man. know-prs-1sg
‘I know that you were giving money to Farhod.’
b.
Men siz(-ning) Farhod-ga
I
you(-gen) Farhod-dat money give-prs.ptcp-comp-2sg.poss-acc bil-a-man.
pul
ber-adigan-lig-ingiz-ni
know-prs-1sg
‘I know that you give (/will give) money to Farhod.’
(55)
a.
U(-ning)
o’qituvchi e-kan-lig-i-ni bil-a-man.
3sg(-gen) teachercop-kan-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
‘I know that he is a teacher.’
b.
∗U(-ning)
o’qituvchi e-di{k/g}an-lig-i-ni
bil-a-man.
3sg(-gen) teachercop-prs.ptcp-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
c.
∗U(-ning)
o’qituvchi e-yot{k/g}an-lig-i-ni bil-a-man.
3sg(-gen) teachercop-prog.ptcp-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
Unlike with -{yot/di}gan-, the copula-adjacent -kan- doesn’t force any tense
interpretation: the tense of the embedded clause always matches the matrix verb (56;
c.f. 54).
(56)
a.
teacher
Siz(-ning) o’qituvchi e-kan-lig-ingiz-ni
bil-ma-d-im.
you(-gen)
cop-kan-comp-2sg.poss-acc know-neg-pst-1sg
‘I didn’t know that you were a teacher.’
b.
Siz(-ning) o’qituvchi e-kan-lig-ingiz-ni
bil-a-man.
you(-gen) teachercop-kan-comp-2sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
‘I know that you are a teacher.’
A second indicator that the copula-adjacent -kan- is not identical to the participial
ending is that it does not behave as expected with respect to voicing of the initial
consonant. True instances of -gan- voice the initial stop of the affix after a vowelfinal root — in (57), the verb root is so’ra‘ask’. The -kan- that appears after the copula
always has a voiceless initial consonant (58).
(57)
U(-ning)
Hasan-dan savol so’ra-{g/*k}an-lig-i-ni bil-a-man.
3sg(-gen) Hasan-abl question ask-pst.ptcp-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg I
know that he asked Hasan a question.’
(58)
U(-ning)
3sg(-gen) teacher
o’qituvchi e-{k/*g}an-lig-i-ni bil-a-man.
cop-kan-comp-3sg.poss-acc know-prs-1sg
‘I know that he is a teacher.’
I will not elaborate here on what the function of copula-adjacent -kan- is in
nominalized clauses. For our purposes, all that is important is that it regularly goes
missing along with the copula in such environments (e.g. (52), and many subsequent
examples).
In total, the syntactic picture outlined here indicates that the availability of reduction
in the slc is purely epiphenomenal: no special process need be invoked. Such
explanations are not available for languages that don’t have independently attested
strategies of for eliminating the relevant material; this puts limits on how frequently,
and for what kinds of languages, the rcc strategy can be invoked as an explanation
for slcs.
CONCLUSION
We investigated the reduction in different languages in our paper and came to
the following conclusion:
Reduction refers to various changes in the acoustic quality of vowels,
which are related to changes in stress, sonority, duration, loudness, articulation, or
position.
The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by
phraseological units. Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in
the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units.
They are compiled in special dictionaries. The same as words phraseological
units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it.
Phraseological units can be classified according to the ways they are formed,
according to the degree of the motivation of their meaning, according to their
structure and according to their part-of-speech meaning.
According to the results, teaching experience was an important factor in
observing vowel reduction. Generally, correct pronunciation of reduced vowels
enhanced with the increase of teaching experience until 20 years. The fact that
correct vowel pronunciation in the more experienced teachers of above 20 years of
experience decreases, especially above 25 years can be justified by the fact that
English was not as important as today at universities and higher education centres.
The problem of vowel reduction which is generally determined by word
stress is a major problem for both EFL teachers and students. In languages such as
English in which stress affects word meaning, awareness of the rules of stress,
stressed syllables and changing of word pronunciation as a result of derivations are
of utmost importance. Seemingly, the problem of pronunciation and stress has not
been paid ample attention in EFL contexts in Iran and is often neglected both in
teacher training centres and in other universities and schools. In fact, it is due to
lack of training that the incorrect transfer of mother tongue structure affects English
pronunciation and in other words interferes with the English pronunciation.
Literature to be used
1.
Karimov I.A. “Uzbekistan along the road of deepening economic reform”.
Tashkent- “Uzbekistan” – 1995.
2.
Karimov I.A. Resolution on 2010 - “Year of harmoniously developed
generation”.
3.
Karimov I.A. Independent Uzbekistan – Tashkent: Ukituvchi, 2001.
4.
PQ-1875 «On measures to further improvement of foreign language learning
system» Xalqso’zi December 10, 2012.
5.
Амосова Н.Н. Основы английской фразеологии. Л. 1963. - 237 с.
6.
Англо-русский фразеологический словарь. М., (1955).
7.
Муминов О. Инглиз тили лексикологияси. Т. 2006. - 176 б.
8.
Арнольд И.В. Лексикология современного английского языка. М. 1983.
- 346 с.
9.
Виноградов В.В. Лексикология и лексикография. М., 1977. - 279 с.
10.
Кунин А.В. Английская фразеология. М., 1970. - 295 с.
11.
Смирницкий А.И. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956. - 179 с.
12.
Akhamova O. Linguistic Terminology. Moscow University Press. M. 1977 –
133 p.
13.
Akhamova O. Terminology: Theory and Method. M.1977. – 322 p.
14.
Arnold I.V. The English Word. M. 1986. – 298 p.
15.
Buranov J., Muminov. O. A Practical Course in English Lexicology”. T. 1992.
– 178 p.
16. Dominguez Barajas, Elias. 2010. The function of proverbs in discourse.
Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
17. Grzybek, Peter. "Proverb." Simple Forms: An Encyclopaedia of Simple
TextTypes in Lore and Literature, ed. Walter Koch. Bochum:Brockmeyer, 1994.
227.
18.
Hatch E., Brown Ch. Vocabulary; Semantic and Language Education. L.1992.
-156 p.
19.
James R.H., Heasley B. Semantics: a Course Book. L. 1994. – 194 p.
20.
Kempson R.M. Semantic Theory. L. 1993. – 148 p.
21.
Mac Coinnigh, Marcas. 2012. Syntactic Structures in Irish-Language
Proverbs. Proverbium: Yearbook of International Proverb Scholarship 29, 95-136.
22.
McArthur T. Lexicon of Contemporary English. Longman “Longman Group
Limited”. L. 1981. – 156 p.
23.
McCarthy M. Discourse Analyses for Language Teacher. L 1993. – 211 p.
24.
McKnight C.H. English Words and Their Background. New-York London.
1981. – 277 p.
25.
Mieder, Wolfgang. (2004). Proverbs - A Handbook. Westport, CT;
Greenwood Press.
26.
Muminov O. Modern English Lexicology. T. 2005 – 215 p.
27.
Norwood J. E. Concerning Words. New York. 1976. – 287 p.
28.
http:// www.cogweb.c om
29.
http:// www.proverbs . com